Comments

I'm all for people choosing to smoke if they want, whether they have asthma or not. Just don't complain that a tiny bit of dust might give you an asthma attack and then go inhale a crap ton of smoke and act like its nothing.

no they dont, but some could theoretically. There's also a few sharks that can and do (although extremely rarely) eat people. People long ago didnt distinguish between fish/whale/shark so Jonah technically could have been eaten by a shark, or some crazy fish creature we've never seen before too.

@bookworm All of those actors have been stars in movies

Not sure what the other guest is saying, but usually for something big like a school campus or restaurant franchise where there is gonna be tons of vending machines and fountain drink dispensers and whatnot, they give a HUGE discount as long as its an exclusive deal with that company. So the owners can either pay $.25 a bottle and make $1 by only selling coke or only selling pepsi, or they can get both (assuming the 2 companies would even allow it) and end up paying $.75 a bottle and make $.50 (completely made up numbers but the idea is the same)
Now if you only had 1 vending machine, (or more than likely where you see both together, just a fridge with a glass door that holds only bottles)they probably give you little to no discount so it wouldn't be too hard to get both brands, but for big companies you'd be stupid to get both and not get a huge discount.

Pretty sure the commenter knew that the quote was about how it limits innovation when people brush off new ideas because its always been done another way, they were just making a joke about how if the new idea wasn't actually a good idea, then it could be really bad.
But to clarify, the "other" person DID respond with "B-but we've always done it this way!" first, he just went on to clarify that they were talking about replacing a heart valve so the reader would understand exactly whats going on. Its a writing technique to help explain to the audience what is happening with 1 quick sentence rather than writing a bunch of boring non-dialogue describing the setting to the reader.

And to clear up some of the confusion people seem to be having for how some people started shortening United States of America to just America, it wasn't to just shorten United States of America, as USA or US would be shorter and easier. It was because the people FROM the US, as I said above, are called AMERICANS. Somebody (and ya, it probably started with a dumb American) went through the thought process of "well Canadians are from Canada, Mexicans from Mexico, English from England, etc. Since I'm American, I can probably just say I'm from America and be fine" and the word stuck because it sounded better than some abbreviation of letters and they didn't realize or think about the fact that there is a whole other continent that's also "America".

Also, to everybody saying "North America isn't a continent, its the Americas" you do realize that depending on what country you are in, you are taught the continents differently right? Just about the only people that are taught "the Americas" are one continent, are people from Latin America and a few countries in Europe. Most of the population is taught that North America and South America are 2 different continents (As in most of China, India, Australia, England, Eastern Europe, Japan, Russia, and the US. Some of those call Europe and Asia Eurasia, but they still separate the Americas)

So....what exactly do you call somebody from the country of "the United States of America" then if you don't call them American? I'm not talking about what do you call the country as its been shown that can be many things (USA, the states, US, United States, United States of America), but what do you call the people from said country (excluding of course derogatory terms). Because everywhere I've gone, people have referred to people from the USA as Americans.

Don't worry, they have a word for Mexicans too....more than one actually...but somehow they are all more offensive since its not directed towards white males.

You start with 2, which is a prime number, and then you can exclude every multiple of 2 (2,4,6,8,etc) because its impossible for any of those to be prime since they are divisible by 2. Then you go to the next "free" number which is 3 and can then exclude any multiple of 3 that didnt already get excluded by 2 (9,15,21,etc). The next number is 4, but its been excluded already so the next "free" number is 5. Repeat for 5 and the next number is 7. Every time you get to a new number that hasn't already been excluded means that it is a prime number.
The colors are just to help visually see the excluded/prime/free numbers. Dark color means its prime, lighter shade of that color means its excluded by that prime and gray means its a free number that hasn't been determined yet.

Actually for being completely wrong. While a lot of species of whales wouldn't be able to fit a human in their throats, some definitely have big enough throats to make it possible. Particularly if they chomped the person in half first.
Now whether a person could be swallowed whole and survive 3 days or not is a completely different question, but its not what the teacher was discussing.

Yet if it were a made up quote to make Obama look bad, instead of everybody laughing at it, they'd be calling him another stupid-redneck-gun loving-racist that needs to research things before posting trash like that.

Funny how people make up stuff like this and everybody just accepts it and talks about how stupid the person and Fox are...then when asked to show any sort of proof about it and all the sudden all you hear are cricket noises.

Yes because most people would rather have a stub instead of a fixed finger if its possible....

There doesn't need to be a warning label on them. They are quite obviously packaged so that a child wouldn't happen to swallow the entire plastic yellow egg inside (different story for the pieces in the egg, but not important). Its not a matter of "lol American kids so dumb they'd swallow the plastic" its that it used to be kind of a big thing to put "prizes" into baked goods (possibly originated from over in Europe?). Such as putting a coin somewhere in a cake. If you didn't know it was a special cake, you would probably just bite right into a slice of it given to you, if there happened to be some hard coin or toy in it, it would hurt like hell to bite and possibly seriously injure you. Rather than deal with the lawsuits and problems, the FDA straight out banned ALL food with non food items enclosed inside. Doesn't matter how obvious or labeled it is, if it is completely enclosed (such as with an egg shaped chocolate layer) then its illegal.

I would hope you don't read that slow

Nope its buckle, as in to tighten your belt and get to work.

If you really want to get into it, technically the burden of proof goes upon the person with the new idea that's different from the "norm" and since the norm was to believe that there IS some form of higher being, regardless of which specific religion you believe in, that would mean that the burden of proof is on the atheists with the new idea that there is no God/s. Trying to push the burden onto religious people is the essence of burden of proof reversal

That or they have some acronym for the letters to stand for something. Either way, stupid stuff like a lot of this DOES happen.
A lot of it is also just because people aren't taught about it or are taught wrong.
Girl doesn't know sex leads to pregnancy....has she ever been told that? How the hell should she know if nobody tells her? Maybe she had strict religious parents that just believed she wouldn't do it or maybe she just had shitty parents that thought "the talk" would be too awkward so they didn't wanna deal with it.
When kids are young, they are taught "oh that person has diabetes, she's not sick or anything though, she just has diabetes (and then maybe a vague definition of what diabetes is that is 90% wrong)" because the parents don't want the other kids to think they aren't "normal" so they don't get made fun of. It wouldn't be hard for a kid to grow up and not understand that its a disease.

it ended with a line of wasabi

Had a friend that would snort anything if you paid him. And I don't mean pay him well, I mean like "hey snort this line of salt for $1" and he would do it. You could tell hit hurt like hell, but he refused to say it hurt. So since it "didn't hurt" we kept daring him to snort more and more things

Or they just wanted to make a joke

But it IS in the US even if 100% of it isn't. And actually 2 of the 3 falls ARE completely in the US. So saying "Niagara falls are in Canada" to counter somebody calling them the most beautiful in the US is pretty much just flat out wrong.
I wouldn't call them the most beautiful to begin with, but that's besides the point.

...Except heat conduction still works upwards...
Granted its terribly inefficient, but it would still keep a drink cold for a lot longer than just sitting on a counter that's room temp.

Technically you don't "throw it" at all, as that would give it more force and it WOULD smack you in the head. That was his whole point of not giving it any extra energy, you have to just let it drop with no extra push.

Networking, and any form of communication, is part of your work though. If you aren't doing it, then you aren't really working as hard as you could or should be. You don't have to be charismatic and good looking to network well, but you DO have to be good at something and able to show/tell other people that you are good at that thing.

"if they aren't ready, then they won't have a child of their own" Seriously? You honestly believe that?

While I agree its prayer with the whole holy looking sunlight in the background, you could very easily high 5 somebody and have thumbs touching (your right hand their left, or your left and their right).
If it was a high five, they woulda used red and blue for the sleeves to differentiate between people. Or different skin tones. And why would it be causing rays of light?

Western Sahara is technically a disputed territory, so its not necessarily part of Morocco unless/until they completely take it over.

Over $100 billion is marginal to him? Thats more than his entire net worth today. Think about all the money you save for the next 50 years, all the assets you build (house, cars, business, etc.) and then just giving away 3/5 of ALL of that. That would be marginal to you?

And how often do you look in photo albums or, more often than not, go through that gigantic stack of photos you got developed but never bothered to frame or put in an album? You can print out and frame a digital picture just as easy as you could an old picture. Faster and easier actually since you wouldn't have to go to a store to develop them first.

You probably shouldn't ever play suck and blow as a teenager then....since this IS THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE GAME. Be like playing spin the bottle and then bitching about the guy trying to kiss you when the bottle lands on you. If you don't want kissed, don't play the frickin game.

Well they could be under 14 years old and then it would technically be the wrong century also

Technically, the other guest never said feminists or feminism. He said feminazis, which you can basically infer that it means the extremists.
Also, there is really no point in debating the actual definition of a word, and how it is most commonly used. Itd be like if the actual definition of redneck was a synonym for aristocrat/upper class/elitist, and getting mad at everybody that used redneck to refer to hillbillies, including all those hillbillies that call themselves rednecks. Rather than try to convince just about everybody out there that they are using the word wrong and should be using some other word, don't you think it'd be easier to just come up with a new name that doesn't have such a bad connotation and isn't associated with those people?

The teacher could also get mad about it and throw it all out for a retest or just not do the curve grading and fail everybody

The most common "curve" you see today though isn't really a curve at all, its just called that because its another adjustment to the student's real scores. The teacher takes the highest score, whatever it may be, and brings it up to 100%. Then they add whatever % they gave that student to everybody else's grade. So if the highest grade was a 90%, every grade gets 10% added on. If the highest was a 99%, only 1% is added on. So when you hear that *insert super smart student's name* "broke the curve" on a test, it means they scored super high on it, so there isn't much to add to them to make 100% meaning everybody else doesn't get to add much.
In this case, if every single student marks A, they would all get the exact same score. Since whatever score that may be is the top score, it would get brought up to 100% and every student would get a 100%.
The problem with it is all it takes is 1 kid to actually work on the test and get higher to completely screw up everybody else.

Never heard of the sqrt one, but I suppose thatd work too. Although I'm sure there would be a lot of complaints about how it helps the lower grades a LOT more than the higher grades (a 90% would gain almost 5% while a 50% score would gain almost 21%)
Your 1st one is the original true "curve" grading, its based on normal distribution (a bell curve) so very few get the extreme ends, As and Ds/Fs, and most end up getting Cs/Bs. The problem with it is if everybody in the class does really well, somebody is still screwed.
Say you have 10 kids and they all scored above a 90% (what most schools consider an A) whoever got the lowest would still fail because somebody has to be on the low extreme.

They obviously used their brain at some point to get rich. Peasant.

Just had to lol at "atheists who debate religion generally have the decency to research religious beliefs"
For every bible thumping-evolution is a lie-Christian that doesn't know anything about scientific theories, there are just as many Condescending-pompous-Atheist that have zero clue about the religion that they are bashing as untrue and stupid.

Although I'd agree its still overkill to not want them to sign their name in cursive.

Not sure what exactly nande said, but in response to sayor, its not that women are "used" (at least not in this question to Martin) its the fact that even when a writer creates a main/leader/important character thats a woman, a lot of the time they just don't know how to write from a woman's perspective (much of the time due to the writer being male). This leads to the writer either making them overly "girlie" to emphasize that they are female, or they under "girlie" them and they come across as boring/man-ish/flat/etc. They'll also tend to write less dialogue/scenes/etc. for the character because of it being harder for them, they'll tend to focus more onto the characters they find easier to write about.
Most books you'll find with well written female characters happen to be written by females because they have a much easier time of making a "good" female.
(Not that their aren't many books by guys with good female chars, GoT for one, just you'll have to search a lot more to find em)